Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this message. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
New initiative: No children? Then no marriage 'Absurd' idea aims to start discussion By RACHEL LA CORTE THE ASSOCIATED PRESS OLYMPIA -- Proponents of same-sex marriage have introduced an initiative that would put a whole new twist on traditional unions between men and women: It would require heterosexual couples to have children within three years or else have their marriages annulled. Initiative 957 was filed by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance, which was formed last summer after the state Supreme Court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage. In that 5-4 ruling, the court found that state lawmakers were justified in passing the 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which restricts marriage to unions between a man and a woman. In defending the act, the ruling specifically mentioned a state interest in furthering procreation. Under I-957, marriage would be limited to men and women who are able to have children. Couples would be required to prove they can have children to get a marriage license. If they did not have children within three years, their marriages would be subject to annulment. All other marriages would be defined as "unrecognized" and people in them would be ineligible to receive marriage benefits. "Absurd? Very," the group says on its Web site, which adds it is planning two more initiatives involving marriage and procreation. "But there is a rational basis for this absurdity. By floating the initiatives, we hope to prompt discussion about the many misguided assumptions" underlying the Supreme Court's ruling. Gregory Gadow, who filed I-957 last month, said the three-year time frame was arbitrary. "We did toy with the idea of (requiring) procreation before marriage," he said. "We didn't want to (annoy) the fundamentalists too much." Gadow said that if the group's initiatives were passed, the Supreme Court would be forced to strike them down as unconstitutional, which he believes would weaken the original ruling upholding the Defense of Marriage Act. But he said he highly doubts that any of the initiatives will pass, and that they are being done "in the spirit of political street theater." "Our intention is not to actually put this into law," he said. "All we want is to get this on the ballot and cause people to talk about it." Cheryl Haskins, executive director of Allies for Marriage & Children, agreed with Gadow's group on at least one point about the initiative: "It's absurd," she said. Haskins said opponents of same-sex marriage "have never said that the sole purpose of marriage is procreation." The measure's backers said the two other initiatives they plan would prohibit divorce or separation when a married couple had children and would make having a child together the equivalent of marriage. Gadow said his goal is to raise $300,000 to spend on advertising on the first initiative. _____________________________ Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or you can visit: http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news Go to that same web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe. E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few days will become disabled or deleted from this list. FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. I am making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.
